Is this a loophole in the Georgia Campaign Finance Act?

Under the Georgia Campaign Finance Act, public agencies, which the City of Atlanta Department of Watershed Management would appear to be, “No [public] agency and no person acting on behalf of an agency shall make, directly or indirectly, any contribution to any campaign committee, political action committee, or political organization or to any candidate.” For purposes of this section of the Act,

“Contribution” means a gift, subscription, membership, loan, forgiveness of debt, advance or deposit of money, or anything of value conveyed or transferred by or on behalf of an agency, without receipt of payment therefore, to any campaign committee, political action committee, or political organization or to any candidate for campaign purposes.

§21-5-30.2.

Elsewhere in the act, we have some definitions of “Contribution” and “Expenditure” that are broader.

(7) “Contribution” means a gift, subscription, membership, loan, forgiveness of debt, advance or deposit of money or anything of value conveyed or transferred for the purpose of influencing the nomination for election or election of any person for office, bringing about the recall of a public officer holding elective office or opposing the recall of a public officer holding elective office, or the influencing of voter approval or rejection of a proposed constitutional amendment, a state-wide referendum, or a proposed question which is to appear on the ballot in this state or in a county or a municipal election in this state. The term specifically shall not include the value of personal services performed by persons who serve without compensation from any source and on a voluntary basis. The term “contribution” shall include other forms of payment made to candidates for office or who hold office when such fees and compensation made can be reasonably construed as a campaign contribution designed to encourage or influence a candidate or public officer holding elective office. The term “contribution” shall also encompass transactions wherein a qualifying fee required of the candidate is furnished or paid by anyone other than the candidate.

and “Expenditure” is defined thus:

“Expenditure” means a purchase, payment, distribution, loan, advance, deposit, or any transfer of money or anything of value made for the purpose of influencing the nomination for election or election of any person, bringing about the recall of a public officer holding elective office or opposing the recall of a public officer holding elective office, or the influencing of voter approval or rejection of a proposed constitutional amendment, a state-wide referendum, or a proposed question which is to appear on the ballot in this state or in a county or a municipal election in this state.

§21-5-3(7) and §21-5-3(12).

But it appears that nothing in this section prevents a public agency from making an expenditure to influence voter approval or rejection of a ballot question. Can this be right? And the fact that the City of Atlanta Department of Watershed Management appears as the purported sender of this direct mail does not prove that the Department actually paid for or authorized the mailing.

It’s also unclear if you could show that this mailer actually attempts to influence voter approval or rejection, though I infer from the content that it is attempting to influence voters.